One thing last night's game told me is that we're one player away from a trip to the finals. We need a consistent outside threat, someone who can spread the floor like Cro did in game 4.

Another thing it told me is that we shouldn't trade Ron, if at all possible. I've been on the fence about this since the season ended, but after watching last night's game, I'm pretty convinced Ron should remain a Pacer. If the Pistons win this series it will be because of their defense.

Al and some change should be able to net us a good perimeter shooter. The question is, who? And what caliber.

Suaveness

06-07-2004, 11:47 AM

I agree with what you said. One shooter away from WINNING the title, too.

Unclebuck

06-07-2004, 12:47 PM

I agree, but I am curious as to why last night's game convinced you that artest should not be traded

bulletproof

06-07-2004, 01:41 PM

I agree, but I am curious as to why last night's game convinced you that artest should not be traded.

One word, UB: defense.

That's what will win this series for Detroit. And that's what will keep the Pacers and the Pistons competitve against each other and the West. Lose Ron, and we're just not the same defensively. I'd much rather keep him and trade Al for a consistent, up-and-coming shooter versus trade Ron for a superstar shooter and lose what he brings to the team defensively.

We didn't get blown out by Detroit. We had two key players injured and are lacking a consistent outside threat, as evidenced by Cro's performance in game 4. A tweak will do, not a major redirection of the team that trading Ron would bring.

sweabs

06-07-2004, 01:44 PM

I agree, but I am curious as to why last night's game convinced you that artest should not be traded.

One word, UB: defense.

That's what will win this series for Detroit. And that's what will keep the Pacers and the Pistons competitve against each other and the West. Lose Ron, and we're just not the same defensively. I'd much rather keep him and trade Al for a consistent, up-and-coming shooter versus trade Ron for a superstar shooter and lose what he brings to the team defensively.

We didn't get blown out by Detroit. We had two key players injured and are lacking a consistent outside threat, as evidenced by Cro's performance in game 4. A tweak will do, not a major redirection of the team that trading Ron would bring.

Ron has to stay. Defense is what will keep us competitve against the Pistons, and we just need a good SG who can knock down their shots and create off the dribble - that's it. I truly expect Ron to mature more over this offseason.

Suaveness

06-07-2004, 01:47 PM

Yes. LA will not beat Detroit because of defense. Defense wins championships. And this is why, as Bullet has mentioned, why both us and det. will be competitive for awhile. And losing Ron would be detrimental.

Unclebuck

06-07-2004, 02:27 PM

That's what will win this series for Detroit. And that's what will keep the Pacers and the Pistons competitve against each other and the West. Lose Ron, and we're just not the same defensively. I'd much rather keep him and trade Al for a consistent, up-and-coming shooter versus trade Ron for a superstar shooter and lose what he brings to the team defensively.

We didn't get blown out by Detroit. We had two key players injured and are lacking a consistent outside threat, as evidenced by Cro's performance in game 4. A tweak will do, not a major redirection of the team that trading Ron would bring.

Sing that from the mountain tops. Could not agree more

TheSauceMaster

06-07-2004, 02:42 PM

One thing last night's game told me is that we're one player away from a trip to the finals. We need a consistent outside threat, someone who can spread the floor like Cro did in game 4.

Another thing it told me is that we shouldn't trade Ron, if at all possible. I've been on the fence about this since the season ended, but after watching last night's game, I'm pretty convinced Ron should remain a Pacer. If the Pistons win this series it will be because of their defense.

Al and some change should be able to net us a good perimeter shooter. The question is, who? And what caliber.

I think this is the first post ever I have to agree with what BP said , hell it maybe the last :laugh:

foretaz

06-17-2005, 06:38 AM

One word, UB: defense.

That's what will win this series for Detroit. And that's what will keep the Pacers and the Pistons competitve against each other and the West. Lose Ron, and we're just not the same defensively. I'd much rather keep him and trade Al for a consistent, up-and-coming shooter versus trade Ron for a superstar shooter and lose what he brings to the team defensively.

We didn't get blown out by Detroit. We had two key players injured and are lacking a consistent outside threat, as evidenced by Cro's performance in game 4. A tweak will do, not a major redirection of the team that trading Ron would bring.

hmmmmm.....going thru these archives can really prove to be interesting...

Mourning

06-17-2005, 06:55 AM

Someone is browsing the archives here :uhoh: ;)

Bball

06-17-2005, 08:27 AM

Hard to believe an incident like 11/19 can take a former fence sitter and cause him to jump to the other side....

Or an incident like a few days prior when he 'quit' on his team...

-Bball

Shade

06-17-2005, 10:30 AM

Hard to believe an incident like 11/19 can take a former fence sitter and cause him to jump to the other side....

Or an incident like a few days prior when he 'quit' on his team...

-Bball

Does that mean we should jettison Jack and JO as well? After all, they were just as bad, if not worse, than Ron during the brawl.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 10:54 AM

I'm starting to feel like Michael Douglas in Fatal Attraction.

But since we're dredging up old posts, let's see what I wrote, oh, yesterday...

Before I answer this, I want to clarify something. I've made my feelings about Ron (as a player) pretty well known, but I was willing to give him the benefit of doubt going into this season. I started having my doubts around the time he had his thumb surgery, but still maintained some hope that all the behind-the-scenes grumblings I was hearing were incidental in the bigger scheme of things. Even the ECFs didn't completely drag me down even though I knew he was being shopped last summer largely because of what was perceived to be an inability to handle the pressure of a deep playoff run. Watching the first 7 games of this past season was incredibly uplifting and when we shredded the defending champs on their own court, I was ecstatic.

That all evaporated when Ron charged into the stands.

Now, I sat there and watched the replays and wanted to find some modicum of comfort in what the commentators were saying that night by placing the blame largely on the fans. I really wanted to believe that...but it didn't sit right with me. Deep down I knew that our season had been destroyed and that the franchise's reputation had been sullied, and at the center of all that was none other than who else. And please pay particular attention to those last two words—Who else. Because that is where my chagrin lies.

What does this tell me? Unlike some people on this forum, I have the ability to change my mind, which was the point of the thread I addressed to Skaut.

"Do I contradict myself?
Very well then, I contradict myself.
I am large,
I contain multitudes."

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 11:54 AM

Hard to believe an incident like 11/19 can take a former fence sitter and cause him to jump to the other side....

Or an incident like a few days prior when he 'quit' on his team...

-Bball

Imagine that.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 12:29 PM

Does that mean we should jettison Jack and JO as well? After all, they were just as bad, if not worse, than Ron during the brawl.

Jack and JO don't have the history Ron does. Their actions that night were isolated incidents.

Shade

06-17-2005, 12:36 PM

Jack and JO don't have the history Ron does. Their actions that night were isolated incidents.

Maybe JO, but I wouldn't say that necessarily about Jack. I could easily see him blowing his stack again before Ron does.

Let's face it -- we are NOT a championship-caliber team w/o Ron (or, at least, with what we could get for him). We at least have a chance if Ron keeps his head screwed on.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 12:39 PM

Maybe JO, but I wouldn't say that necessarily about Jack. I could easily see him blowing his stack again before Ron does.

Let's face it -- we are NOT a championship-caliber team w/o Ron (or, at least, with what we could get for him). We at least have a chance if Ron keeps his head screwed on.

:rolleyes:

Pssst...I'll let you in on a little secret: Neither Detroit or San Antonio has Ron on their team and one of them will win the championship this year.

EDIT: Jack does not have the history Ron does.

Shade

06-17-2005, 12:44 PM

:rolleyes:

Pssst...I'll let you in on a little secret: Neither Detroit or San Antonio has Ron on their team and one of them will win the championship this year.

Detroit has five all-stars in their starting line-up.

SA has two superstars in their line-up.

We don't have the former, but we can have the latter w/Ron.

And the only reason one of those teams will win is because we didn't have Ron in our line-up, either. ;)

Pig Nash

06-17-2005, 12:46 PM

:rolleyes:

Pssst...I'll let you in on a little secret: Neither Detroit or San Antonio has Ron on their team and one of them will win the championship this year.

OK, I'm getting tired of that argument. Let's compare, shall we?

Detroit
Ben
Rashweed
Prince
Rip
Billups

San Antonio
Nazr
Duncan
Bowen
Manu
Parker

Indiana
DD
JO
(anyone we could get for Ron)
Jack
Tins

They don't have Ron but they do have multiple allstar callibre players. We would not have another great player to go with JO if we didn't have Ron. So give it up with the "you can win a championship without ron artest." We know that but we think Ron is the only player we can get/keep that puts us up there with Detroit and San Antonio.

EDIT: Darnit. Shade said the same thing only better already.

Moses

06-17-2005, 12:48 PM

Detroit has five all-stars in their starting line-up.

SA has two superstars in their line-up.

We don't have the former, but we can have the latter w/Ron.

And the only reason one of those teams will win is because we didn't have Ron in our line-up, either. ;)
They do not have 5 all-stars in their lineup. They have 2 or 3 at the very most. Calling Ben Wallace an all-star is a stretch. He's a great shot blocker and rebounder..But that doesn't make him an all-star. You can't call Prince an all-star either because he really can't create his own shot..The only reason people misnomer them as all-stars is because they play good team ball and get eachother involved. The only 2 players on that team I would consider all-stars are Chauncey and Rip. Rasheed is way to inconsistent.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 12:51 PM

Detroit has five all-stars in their starting line-up.

SA has two superstars in their line-up.

We don't have the former, but we can have the latter w/Ron.

And the only reason one of those teams will win is because we didn't have Ron in our line-up, either. ;)

Oy-vay.

Tell you what, seeing as I have demonstrated the ability to change my mind, if the Pacers decide to keep Ron and he gets through the entire season without any disruptions or inidents, and he keeps his head in the ECFs, I'll jump right back up on the fence about him. Maybe I'll even jump all the way to the other side. That's my promise to you.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 12:57 PM

So give it up with the "you can win a championship without ron artest."

No. And if you're paying attention, you'll see that Shade is sidestepping the real point of this discussion with ancillary arguments.

Shade

06-17-2005, 12:58 PM

Oy-vay.

Tell you what, seeing as I have demonstrated the ability to change my mind, if the Pacers decide to keep Ron and he gets through the entire season without any disruptions or inidents, and he keeps his head in the ECFs, I'll jump right back up on the fence about him. Maybe I'll even jump all the way to the other side. That's my promise to you.

I'll just ask you this much:

Do you believe the Pacers are a championship contender, right now, w/o Ron? How about w/Ron?

Shade

06-17-2005, 12:59 PM

No. And if you'll pay particular attention, you'll see that Shade is sidestepping the real point of this discussion with ancillary arguments.

Other teams can win the championship without Ron because they have other stars in his place. We don't. Our current team, with Ron, is a championship contender. Our current team, without Ron, is not.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 12:59 PM

I'll just ask you this much:

Do you believe the Pacers are a championship contender, right now, w/o Ron? How about w/Ron?

See post above yours.

Jermaniac

06-17-2005, 01:33 PM

OK, I'm getting tired of that argument. Let's compare, shall we?

Detroit
Ben
Rashweed
Prince
Rip
Billups

San Antonio
Nazr
Duncan
Bowen
Manu
Parker

Indiana
DD
JO
(anyone we could get for Ron)
Jack
Tins

They don't have Ron but they do have multiple allstar callibre players. We would not have another great player to go with JO if we didn't have Ron. So give it up with the "you can win a championship without ron artest." We know that but we think Ron is the only player we can get/keep that puts us up there with Detroit and San Antonio.

EDIT: Darnit. Shade said the same thing only better already.
Thank you, I swear its the stupidest argument used on here. And this guy Harmonica thinks trading Ron for Mike Dunleavy will make us a championship contending team.Yeah lets trade the best defensive player in the NBA for Mike Dunleavy and watch us roll over Detroit and the Heat. Yes teams have won with out Ron Artest, but who ever we trade Ron for, the trade would make us a worse team. Cause his value is so low there is no way we will get someone as good as him.

Jermaniac

06-17-2005, 01:34 PM

Other teams can win the championship without Ron because they have other stars in his place. We don't. Our current team, with Ron, is a championship contender. Our current team, without Ron, is not.BOOM BABY

Shade

06-17-2005, 01:38 PM

BOOM BABY

BOOM...goes the dynamite? :confused: :uhoh:

Shade

06-17-2005, 01:39 PM

See post above yours.

Sorry, bullet, but I seriously don't get what you're trying to say. I think I've made my stance pretty clear. :shrug:

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 01:40 PM

Thank you, I swear its the stupidest argument used on here. And this guy Harmonica thinks trading Ron for Mike Dunleavy will make us a championship contending team. Yeah lets trade the best defensive player in the NBA for Mike Dunleavy and watch us roll over Detroit and the Heat. Yes teams have won with out Ron Artest, but who ever we trade Ron for, the trade would make us a worse team. Cause his value is so low there is no way we will get someone as good as him.

Show me where I said that.

Since86

06-17-2005, 02:18 PM

And it's where I was going in the thread I addressed to Skaut when it was hijacked by Since86.

:rolleyes:

I would suggest using the words you actually mean then, since it really wasn't an analogy.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 02:24 PM

Sorry, bullet, but I seriously don't get what you're trying to say. I think I've made my stance pretty clear. :shrug:

Clear or not, you took this discussion somewhere else. foretaz dredged up an old thread where I stated my feelings about Ron at the time and tried to show how I had done a 180 on my thinking, as if that were a bad thing. Bball made a very pointed remark and I responded in kind as well. Go back and re-read what I said.

The point is, I'm one of the few people here who have demonstrated an ability to change my mind on the topic of Ron. You completely dismissed (or missed) that and tried to take this somewhere else. You may be making valid points, but I don't care because you (and a lot of other people, on both sides of the argument) have clearly demonstrated that you incapable of hearing other people's opinions when it comes to Ron. That, my friend, is my point. And it's where I was going in the thread I addressed to Skaut when it was hijacked by Since86.

Shade

06-17-2005, 05:34 PM

Clear or not, you took this discussion somewhere else. foretaz dredged up an old thread where I stated my feelings about Ron at the time and tried to show how I had done a 180 on my thinking, as if that were a bad thing. Bball made a very pointed remark and I responded in kind as well. Go back and re-read what I said.

The point is, I'm one of the few people here who have demonstrated an ability to change my mind on the topic of Ron. You completely dismissed (or missed) that and tried to take this somewhere else. You may be making valid points, but I don't care because you (and a lot of other people, on both sides of the argument) have clearly demonstrated that you incapable of hearing other people's opinions when it comes to Ron. That, my friend, is my point. And it's where I was going in the thread I addressed to Skaut when it was hijacked by Since86.

I have heard the other opinions about Ron ad nauseum -- I just don't agree with them. And I back up that opinion with reasons why. I thought that's what a discussion was, no? :shrug:

If you're trying to say I don't have an open mind on the subject, well, that just goes to show that you don't know me AT ALL. I'm probably one of the most open-minded people you will ever meet.

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 07:03 PM

I have heard the other opinions about Ron ad nauseum -- I just don't agree with them. And I back up that opinion with reasons why. I thought that's what a discussion was, no? :shrug:

If you're trying to say I don't have an open mind on the subject, well, that just goes to show that you don't know me AT ALL. I'm probably one of the most open-minded people you will ever meet.

No, I don't know you at all. You may very well have an open mind, but that certainly isn't evident when you throw a tired statement like this at me—

Let's face it -- we are NOT a championship-caliber team w/o Ron (or, at least, with what we could get for him). We at least have a chance if Ron keeps his head screwed on.

—when it's hardly relevant to what came before it. Think Sassan. :arrgh:

Shade

06-17-2005, 07:25 PM

Think Sassan. :arrgh:

:suicide:

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 07:33 PM

:suicide:

:laugh:

Jesus Shuttlesworth

06-17-2005, 07:37 PM

This thread is pure opinion and not backed up by actual facts...meaning MOVE IT TO SHOUT BOX

SoupIsGood

06-17-2005, 07:38 PM

This thread is pure opinion and not backed up by actual facts...meaning MOVE IT TO SHOUT BOX

Dear Lord, give it a rest, Jesus!

Shade

06-17-2005, 07:39 PM

This thread is pure opinion and not backed up by actual facts...meaning MOVE IT TO SHOUT BOX

Please stop trolling. :troll:

Harmonica

06-17-2005, 07:39 PM

What the hell is going on here? :shrug:

Jesus Shuttlesworth

06-17-2005, 07:41 PM

Im not trolling buddy and I will stop now because SoupIsGood requested it and soup truly is good (especialy potato soup) so I will stop.

Shade

06-17-2005, 07:42 PM

Im not trolling buddy and I will stop now because SoupIsGood requested it and soup truly is good (especialy potato soup) so I will stop.

You do that.

And, yes, you are trolling.

SoupIsGood

06-17-2005, 07:43 PM

Im not trolling buddy and I will stop now because SoupIsGood requested it and soup truly is good (especialy potato soup) so I will stop.

Well, I'm glad you think this. :cool:

I was just making bad joke, though.

Dear Lord? Jesus? Get it?

I suck. :grumble:

Jesus Shuttlesworth

06-17-2005, 07:44 PM

Well, I'm glad you think this. :cool:

I was just making bad joke, though.

Dear Lord? Jesus? Get it?

I suck. :grumble:

I laughed

Shade

06-17-2005, 07:44 PM

What the hell is going on here? :shrug:

Someone is a little miffed that his anti-Pistons tirade, in which such gems as "The Pistons suck!," was moved to the Shout Box. :rollout: